Decision-Making Within Forensic Psychiatric Investigations: The Use of Various Information Sources by Different Expert Groups to Reach Conclusions on Legal Insanity
BackgroundWhich type of information experts use to make decisions regarding legal insanity within forensic psychiatric investigations (FPI) is relatively unknown, both in general and when considering variations due to case context. It is important to explore this area to be able to counteract the ef...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2022-04-01
|
| Series: | Frontiers in Psychiatry |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyt.2022.822519/full |
| _version_ | 1811335161030115328 |
|---|---|
| author | Lizel Göranson Olof Svensson Olof Svensson Peter Andiné Peter Andiné Sara Bromander Sara Bromander Ann-Sophie Lindqvist Bagge Ann-Sophie Lindqvist Bagge Malin Hildebrand Karlén Malin Hildebrand Karlén Malin Hildebrand Karlén |
| author_facet | Lizel Göranson Olof Svensson Olof Svensson Peter Andiné Peter Andiné Sara Bromander Sara Bromander Ann-Sophie Lindqvist Bagge Ann-Sophie Lindqvist Bagge Malin Hildebrand Karlén Malin Hildebrand Karlén Malin Hildebrand Karlén |
| author_sort | Lizel Göranson |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | BackgroundWhich type of information experts use to make decisions regarding legal insanity within forensic psychiatric investigations (FPI) is relatively unknown, both in general and when considering variations due to case context. It is important to explore this area to be able to counteract the effects of various kinds of cognitive bias.MethodThe aim was to explore whether FPI expert groups differed regarding case-specific as well as general use of information types required to make decisions on severe mental disorder (SMD). Three FPI case vignettes were presented to three professional groups involved in FPIs in Sweden (n = 41): forensic psychiatrists (n = 15), psychologists (n = 15), and social workers (n = 11). The participants reported which types of information they required to reach conclusions regarding SMD in each case. They also reported which types of information they had used within general FPI praxis during the previous year and the information types’ perceived usefulness.ResultsThe expert groups differed somewhat regarding what type of information they required for the cases (e.g., results from cognitive testing), but some information was required in all cases (e.g., client’s self-report). Regarding the preliminary assessment of SMD in the three cases, minor differences were found. Within the general FPI praxis, experts reported using several information types, while the general perceived usefulness of these sources varied.DiscussionThe professional groups relied partly on a “core” of information sources, but some case-specific adaptations were found. The professional groups’ inclination to suspect SMD also varied somewhat. This indicates a need to explore the potential consequences of these similarities and differences. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-13T17:20:03Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-0004b04bb88d45d6932becf1e3d8d1f8 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1664-0640 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-13T17:20:03Z |
| publishDate | 2022-04-01 |
| publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Frontiers in Psychiatry |
| spelling | doaj.art-0004b04bb88d45d6932becf1e3d8d1f82022-12-22T02:38:00ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Psychiatry1664-06402022-04-011310.3389/fpsyt.2022.822519822519Decision-Making Within Forensic Psychiatric Investigations: The Use of Various Information Sources by Different Expert Groups to Reach Conclusions on Legal InsanityLizel Göranson0Olof Svensson1Olof Svensson2Peter Andiné3Peter Andiné4Sara Bromander5Sara Bromander6Ann-Sophie Lindqvist Bagge7Ann-Sophie Lindqvist Bagge8Malin Hildebrand Karlén9Malin Hildebrand Karlén10Malin Hildebrand Karlén11Department of Psychology, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, SwedenCentre for Ethics, Law and Mental Health, Department of Psychiatry and Neurochemistry, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, SwedenDepartment of Forensic Psychiatry, Swedish National Board of Forensic Medicine, Gothenburg, SwedenDepartment of Forensic Psychiatry, Swedish National Board of Forensic Medicine, Gothenburg, SwedenForensic Psychiatric Clinic, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, SwedenCentre for Ethics, Law and Mental Health, Department of Psychiatry and Neurochemistry, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, SwedenDepartment of Forensic Psychiatry, Swedish National Board of Forensic Medicine, Gothenburg, SwedenDepartment of Psychology, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, SwedenCentre for Ethics, Law and Mental Health, Department of Psychiatry and Neurochemistry, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, SwedenDepartment of Psychology, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, SwedenCentre for Ethics, Law and Mental Health, Department of Psychiatry and Neurochemistry, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, SwedenDepartment of Forensic Psychiatry, Swedish National Board of Forensic Medicine, Gothenburg, SwedenBackgroundWhich type of information experts use to make decisions regarding legal insanity within forensic psychiatric investigations (FPI) is relatively unknown, both in general and when considering variations due to case context. It is important to explore this area to be able to counteract the effects of various kinds of cognitive bias.MethodThe aim was to explore whether FPI expert groups differed regarding case-specific as well as general use of information types required to make decisions on severe mental disorder (SMD). Three FPI case vignettes were presented to three professional groups involved in FPIs in Sweden (n = 41): forensic psychiatrists (n = 15), psychologists (n = 15), and social workers (n = 11). The participants reported which types of information they required to reach conclusions regarding SMD in each case. They also reported which types of information they had used within general FPI praxis during the previous year and the information types’ perceived usefulness.ResultsThe expert groups differed somewhat regarding what type of information they required for the cases (e.g., results from cognitive testing), but some information was required in all cases (e.g., client’s self-report). Regarding the preliminary assessment of SMD in the three cases, minor differences were found. Within the general FPI praxis, experts reported using several information types, while the general perceived usefulness of these sources varied.DiscussionThe professional groups relied partly on a “core” of information sources, but some case-specific adaptations were found. The professional groups’ inclination to suspect SMD also varied somewhat. This indicates a need to explore the potential consequences of these similarities and differences.https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyt.2022.822519/fulldecision-makingforensic psychiatric investigationpsychiatric assessmentlegal insanityexpert evaluationcourt order |
| spellingShingle | Lizel Göranson Olof Svensson Olof Svensson Peter Andiné Peter Andiné Sara Bromander Sara Bromander Ann-Sophie Lindqvist Bagge Ann-Sophie Lindqvist Bagge Malin Hildebrand Karlén Malin Hildebrand Karlén Malin Hildebrand Karlén Decision-Making Within Forensic Psychiatric Investigations: The Use of Various Information Sources by Different Expert Groups to Reach Conclusions on Legal Insanity Frontiers in Psychiatry decision-making forensic psychiatric investigation psychiatric assessment legal insanity expert evaluation court order |
| title | Decision-Making Within Forensic Psychiatric Investigations: The Use of Various Information Sources by Different Expert Groups to Reach Conclusions on Legal Insanity |
| title_full | Decision-Making Within Forensic Psychiatric Investigations: The Use of Various Information Sources by Different Expert Groups to Reach Conclusions on Legal Insanity |
| title_fullStr | Decision-Making Within Forensic Psychiatric Investigations: The Use of Various Information Sources by Different Expert Groups to Reach Conclusions on Legal Insanity |
| title_full_unstemmed | Decision-Making Within Forensic Psychiatric Investigations: The Use of Various Information Sources by Different Expert Groups to Reach Conclusions on Legal Insanity |
| title_short | Decision-Making Within Forensic Psychiatric Investigations: The Use of Various Information Sources by Different Expert Groups to Reach Conclusions on Legal Insanity |
| title_sort | decision making within forensic psychiatric investigations the use of various information sources by different expert groups to reach conclusions on legal insanity |
| topic | decision-making forensic psychiatric investigation psychiatric assessment legal insanity expert evaluation court order |
| url | https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyt.2022.822519/full |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT lizelgoranson decisionmakingwithinforensicpsychiatricinvestigationstheuseofvariousinformationsourcesbydifferentexpertgroupstoreachconclusionsonlegalinsanity AT olofsvensson decisionmakingwithinforensicpsychiatricinvestigationstheuseofvariousinformationsourcesbydifferentexpertgroupstoreachconclusionsonlegalinsanity AT olofsvensson decisionmakingwithinforensicpsychiatricinvestigationstheuseofvariousinformationsourcesbydifferentexpertgroupstoreachconclusionsonlegalinsanity AT peterandine decisionmakingwithinforensicpsychiatricinvestigationstheuseofvariousinformationsourcesbydifferentexpertgroupstoreachconclusionsonlegalinsanity AT peterandine decisionmakingwithinforensicpsychiatricinvestigationstheuseofvariousinformationsourcesbydifferentexpertgroupstoreachconclusionsonlegalinsanity AT sarabromander decisionmakingwithinforensicpsychiatricinvestigationstheuseofvariousinformationsourcesbydifferentexpertgroupstoreachconclusionsonlegalinsanity AT sarabromander decisionmakingwithinforensicpsychiatricinvestigationstheuseofvariousinformationsourcesbydifferentexpertgroupstoreachconclusionsonlegalinsanity AT annsophielindqvistbagge decisionmakingwithinforensicpsychiatricinvestigationstheuseofvariousinformationsourcesbydifferentexpertgroupstoreachconclusionsonlegalinsanity AT annsophielindqvistbagge decisionmakingwithinforensicpsychiatricinvestigationstheuseofvariousinformationsourcesbydifferentexpertgroupstoreachconclusionsonlegalinsanity AT malinhildebrandkarlen decisionmakingwithinforensicpsychiatricinvestigationstheuseofvariousinformationsourcesbydifferentexpertgroupstoreachconclusionsonlegalinsanity AT malinhildebrandkarlen decisionmakingwithinforensicpsychiatricinvestigationstheuseofvariousinformationsourcesbydifferentexpertgroupstoreachconclusionsonlegalinsanity AT malinhildebrandkarlen decisionmakingwithinforensicpsychiatricinvestigationstheuseofvariousinformationsourcesbydifferentexpertgroupstoreachconclusionsonlegalinsanity |